Legal Opinion

Ottowitz v. Letourneau

Massachusetts Superior Court

Decided January 9, 1995No. 82-2364Published

1Opinion of the CourtGershengorn, J.

The plaintiffs, Peter J. Ottowitz (“Ottowitz”) and Apple Polishes, Incorporated (“Apple”), bring this action for contempt. This court issued a preliminary injunction which essentially restrained defendant, Arlene Letourneau (“Letourneau”), from making use of leather care formulas allegedly owned by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs now contend the defendants violated that order by Letourneau’s continuous sale of leather care products on behalf of her distributor, the defendant S.H. Frank and Company.

S.H. Frank and Company moves to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  4. Tatro v. Manor Care, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
  5. Good Hope Industries, Inc. v. Ryder Scott Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API